Roland Barthes, The Death of the Author - Essay Example

The Power The Power of Communicating the Message of College The Power 2 The Power of Communicating the Message The essay written by Roland Barthes titled The Death of the Author questions the communication process in the way in which an idea is presented to a reader. As an author writes a point of view, that vantage point is subject to the personality of the writer, the interpretation of the reader, and the interjection of the persona of the character from which that point of view is being presented. Therefore, Barthes questions whether the author has as much power as is sometimes assigned to him or her or whether the reader is given the more substantial role in the way in which the communication is received. Artistic authorship can also be subject to this transfer of power in the communication process and can be definitively experienced when looking at works that were created post 1960. In comparing Tom Wesselmann’s Great American Nude No. 98 (1967) and Andy Warhol’s Campbell‘s Soup 1 (1968), a sense of the difference between the artist intent and the viewers interpretation can be clearly understood in regard to the premise that Barthes has made in his compelling essay The Death of the Author. Roland Barthes was a French literary critic, theorist, and philosopher whose essay The Death of the Author created a commentary on the relationship between the reader and the writer. The concept was proposed that a biography of a writer is not of greater importance than the interpretation of the reader when a work is read suggesting that it is hubris to assume what was intended, but that what is experienced by the reader has the greater influence. In an ironic testament to the work of Barthes, Annette Lavers gives a background to his work and attempts to put into perspective the intent of Barthes. Barthes suggests that the relationship of the work of the author becomes infused with those who biographically try to explain the intent of the work. She says that Barthes attempted to “solve this difficulty by separate strategies as semiologist (that is, The Power 3 as scientist) and as writer, echoing the dual approach of the existentialists, their essays dealing with essences and their fiction with existence.”1 Intent is the central question to the essay as Barthes describes the way in which the narrative should not be examined for the intent of the author, but rather for the interpretation of the receiver of this narrative. He uses the example of classic story telling that has the narrative passed from generation to generation without the identity of the author being relevant. In this way, the author has been separated from the work allowing the intention of the work to be without consideration in its reception. He says that “ the responsibility of the narrative is never assumed by a person, but by a mediator, shaman, or relator, whose “performance” - the mastery of the narrative code - may possibly be admired, but never his genius.”2 He further goes on to suggest that the concept of the author is a modern concept as the author has become central to the work that is created. The most poignant examples of this can be visually appreciated when understanding the consumerism that is exampled in the work that is typical of the Pop Art period. As an example, one might look at the work of Tom Wesselmann in order to understand this concept of intent. The work that Wesselmann created had overt sexual context, although with a sense of whimsy and immaturity in its mildly titillating quality. In looking at Wesselmann’s American Nude No. 98, one can see the iconic use of popular culture symbols combined with the sexual insertion of a nude breast and the flattened and depersonalized face of a woman with only her parted, sensual lips upon her face. As one views this piece, the intention of the artist can be subject to the The Power 4 knowledge that the viewer has about sexuality, about the biography of the artist, and about the symbolic use of the iconography. According to Osterwold, “Wesselmann’s pictures show what happens when a person is maneuvered by clever producers into a designed world of sterile artificiality”.3 Because of these various elements, the artwork becomes viewed as an extension of the artist, rather than as a standing piece of work that need not have authorship explained. In looking at the work, one might be able to find context from personal experience, but the intent of the artist becomes central to the examination of the work. This is further experienced when viewing the work of Andy Warhol. Using images that are central to popular consumerist culture, he allowed for the intentional bastardization of artistic form by using common objects in common ways. In Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup 1, the image is simply a large can of soup. Without the intent of the work, the artistic value becomes obsolete. In this way, Warhol made himself more important than the surface content of the work. Without an understanding of the concepts that were promoted by his artistic mission, the work is difficult to appreciate. After all, a can of soup is just a can of soup without understanding that it is a commentary on the consumerist power of branding and the social impact that marketing has made on American culture. Without the underlying context or the intent, the work loses merit. In comparing this with the premise that is posed by Barthes, it can be understood that the social nature of being the artist or the author has changed. Understanding that an artist of any kind must now become a branded commodity, brings the biographical background and the communication of the packaging of the artist to the forefront of the work that is created. The The Power 5 work is not made celebrity as much as the person behind the work. In this way, the author skews the reception of the work. The work becomes viewed by the reputation of the artist or the author and is no longer left pure. The interpretation is colored by the cultural knowledge of the creator of the work. Warhol became the epitome of this concept as he injected himself into the world of his artistic celebrity becoming a commodity in his own right. His name became symbolic of a period and an era because he was propelled into the spotlight with his works. His work would not have had the acclaim that it received without his flamboyant presence to incite the conversation that resulted from his work. The irony of his work is that the very culture that he intended to satirize for its consumerism has embraced his iconographic images as appropriate for consumerist pop culture goods such as notepads, mugs, and t-shirts. Therefore, the work that was intended to both exalt and make fun of the consumerist society, became imagery that promoted and profited from that same culture. Even Warhol was astounded by the way in which he became the product rather than his creation. He reminisced about this when he said “Some company was interested in buying my “aura.”. They didn’t want my product. They kept saying “We want your aura.”.4 In essence, he was the product, not his art. Tom Wesselmann’s work looks to be nothing but soft pornographic imagery until the intent is realized by the viewer. In looking at the work one sees blatant images of sexual content that can seem perverse or obscene until put into context. Once the imagery is understood for a commentary that is drawn from the consumerism of people in celebrity or in the exploitive nature The Power 6 that has evolved around women, the work can be viewed from a different vantage point. According to J, A, Farmer and N. Sawelson-Gorse, Wesselmann’s “tactile quality of these works suggests the smooth surfaces of products such as cars and refrigerators.”5 With each additional piece of knowledge, the work moves from the initial interpretation of an exploitive female form, to the satirical commentary made about consumerism and the commoditization of people. Without an understanding of the artists intent, the message can be subjected to conclusions that are contrary to an educated understanding. Therefore, in the separation of the author to the work, the content is no longer subject to the context in which it is intended to be defined. Wesselmann’s work becomes nothing more than a graphically balanced work that includes a flattened and de-personalized female face and breast with a cigarette burning, an orange, and a box of tissues. Warhol’s painting of a can of Campbell’s soup is simply a picture of a can of soup. Therefore, the premise the Barthes has attempted to insinuate onto the narrative is not validated by these works. The concept that the author merely provides a framework in which the viewer or reader stands as the ultimate judge of the content does not work under the circumstances where the author’s intent is incorporated as necessary in understanding the work. On the other hand, culture has embraced Barthes’s point of view in the consumerism of Warhol’s images without regard to context. His images of Marilyn Monroe and other celebrities are consumed on a large scale on products that are intended to further celebrate Monroe’s and other iconographic images rather than promote the original artistic intent that Warhol The Power 7 constructed. The power of the viewer does obliterate the creators intent in the consumption of product that isn’t intended to promote Warhol, but the product he used for his imagery. Warhol becomes an unnecessary part of the communication of the visual art. From this point of view, the commentary that Barthes has made holds poignantly true. Ultimately, the viewer has the most power in the communication process. If he intent is not made clear by the narrative, the interpretation becomes definitive within the way in which the information is receives. Barthes says “The reader is the space on which all the quotations that make up writing are inscribed”6, suggesting that whatever happens between the mind of the creator of the work, to the actuality of the work, it is in the viewer of reader that the actual communication is realized. When Warhol was approached and asked to sell his aura, this lead him into a philosophical investigation into the definition of that concept. Therefore, the creator of the concept did not conceive in the philosophical undertaking that would be the result of that question. According to Michael Moriarty, Barthes “show(s) how poetic language is a negotiation between the writer and his world.”7 From this point of view, the work of both Wesselmann and Warhol is subject to the cultural interpretation that can be accomplished from both the visual commentary of their work and the promotional philosophy that is released about the intent of the work. As Barthes suggests, without the context of the intent of the creator of the work, the work becomes the sole province of its audience. Therefore, the power of the communication is always going to reside within the knowledge of the viewer. The Power 8 Fig 1. Tom Wesselmann Great American Nude No. 98, 1967. Fig 2. Andy Warhol Campbell’s Soup 1, 1968. The Power 9 Bibliography Barthes, Roland. The Death of the Author found in Janaway, C. (2005). Reading aesthetics and philosophy of art: selected texts with interactive commentary. Malden, MA, Blackwell Pub. Farmer, J. A., & Sawelson-Gorse, N. (2000). The new frontier: art and television, 1960-65. Austin, Tex, Austin Museum of Art. Lavers, A. (1982). Roland Barthes: structuralism and after. London, Methuen. Moriarty, M. (1991). Roland Barthes. Key contemporary thinkers. Stanford, Calif, Stanford University Press. Osterwold, T. (2003). Pop Art. Koln, Taschen. Warhol, A. (2006). The philosophy of Andy Warhol: (from A to B and back again). Orlando, Harcourt. The Power 10 Image Index Fig 1. Tom Wesselmann Great American Nude No. 98, 1967. http://images.search.yahoo.co m/search/images?p=Wesselmann+Great+American+Nude+No.+98&sp=1&fr2=&SpellSt ate=n-520452707_q-Ln/hAUebHAG6O5smF65nSwAAAA@@fr=yfp-t-701 Fig 2. Andy Warhol Campbell’s Soup 1, 1968.http://images.search.yahoo.com/imag es/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp% 3DAndy%2BWarhol%26b%3D21%26ni%3D20%26merge%3D1%26ei%3Dutf- 8%26y%3DSearch%26xargs%3D0%26pstart%3D1%26fr%3Dyfp-t701&w=402& h=402&imgurl=ec-dejavu.ru%2Fimages%2Fw%2Fwarhol6.jpg&rurl= http%3A%2F%2Fec-dejavu.ru%2Fw%2Fwarhol6.html&size=37k&name=warhol6+ jpg&p=Andy+Warhol&oid=0f7ff02e4460c1a2&fr2=&no=34&tt=524529&b=21&ni=20 &m=1&sigr=112v7qfei&sigi=111n4372i&sigb=13tg6nc2f Read More